Nicker on 10/2/2006 at 19:14
As expected, the (
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4701484.stm) case was thrown out, not for lack of merit, in my opinion, but because the judge holds a certain commom but prejudicial view of the question. His recommendation that prosecutors investigate the complainant for slander demonstrates a certain unobjective and emotional response, IMHO.
It's amazing how powerful a fairy tale can be if it gets repeated enough and sufficient blood is spilled defending it.
Stitch on 10/2/2006 at 19:20
Well I can see this one is off to a good start.
ignatios on 10/2/2006 at 19:29
Just like the court case to begin with.
Gingerbread Man on 10/2/2006 at 20:12
I hope you meant "not for lack of merit, but because the judge holds a certain commom but prejudicial view of the question, in my opinion" rather than "not for lack of merit, in my opinion"
Because that case had about as much legal merit as wanting to sue SETI for attracting the aliens' attention and making the come down here to put a chip in my brain so they could steal my thoughts.
Agent Monkeysee on 10/2/2006 at 20:22
Quote Posted by Stitch
Well I can see this one is off to a good start.
Anyone who posts in this thread is a rapist.
TTK12G3 on 10/2/2006 at 20:28
...right before everything goes to hell.
Many happy burnings to you all!
BlackErtai on 10/2/2006 at 20:37
NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
Turtle on 10/2/2006 at 20:48
Hay guys i heard wer'e talikng about mexicans itt.
Confirm/deny?
Agent Monkeysee on 10/2/2006 at 20:51
Sorry, that should have said "papist".
